There is also much more detailed discussion in 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-619 that covers the case where 
Lightbend wanted to give ASF "usage grant without limits" - which did not 
change the ASF "hard no" position.

On 2025/12/02 08:32:08 Jarek Potiuk wrote:
> Hello dear Fineract friends.
> 
> I saw that https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-721  has been opened 
> regarding this discussion in Liquibase to FSL - and since I've been following 
> earlier similar discussion I am almost certain that using Liquibase (if it is 
> a mandatory dependency of Fineract) is going a hard "no".
> 
> This is a very similar case like the earlier Akka licence change to BSL. I am 
> copying here what I wrote in LEGAL-721. I am not a lawyer and not a legal 
> committe member, so I guess you need to wait for Roman or someone from the 
> legal commitee to confirm this but i am very convinced the answer will be 
> "no" (unless Liquibase is an optional dependency for Fineract, which I highly 
> doubt - looking what Liquibase is). 
> 
> However I strongly advince to hold on with releasing Fineract untill the 
> issue is resolved and at the very least until official answer from Legal 
> comes.
> 
> Here is my comment in LEGAL-721
> 
> This has been discussed and "hard no" from Roman Shaposhnik was given [2].
> 
> [1] Change og licence of Akka to BSL: 
> https://akka.io/blog/why-we-are-changing-the-license-for-akka
> 
> [2] Akka BSL Licence change discussion - 
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-620
> 
> 
> 
> The only exception I think is if the software in question is optional feature 
> - then X-Rated licences are possible. The main reaason why we do not allow 
> such software is that when we have a mandatory dependency, we basically force 
> our users to abide to the licence which might limit them not us. So while 
> Fineract is not afffected, the users of Fineract might be and that limits the 
> use of ASF software, which is not something ASF allows
> 
> I guess the options are:
> 
> a) stay as long as possible on ALv2 licenced version of Liguibase
> b) find a replacement
> c) vendor it in Fineract and keep fixing/patching issues on your own
> d) fork Liquibase (or maybe someone already did) and incubate it as Pekko did 
> (but this a hard path and needs people who will create a PMC)
> 
> J.
> 
> 
> 
> On 2025/11/09 03:41:24 VICTOR MANUEL ROMERO RODRIGUEZ wrote:
> > James,
> > 
> > Thank you for the notification.
> > 
> > Regards
> > 
> > Victor
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > El mié, 5 nov 2025 a las 9:58, James Dailey (<[email protected]>) escribió:
> > 
> > > Small news:
> > > The liquibase license is changing to Functional Source License (FSL)
> > >
> > > https://www.liquibase.com/blog/liquibase-community-for-the-future-fsl
> > >
> > > I don't believe this has any impact on us, as we are not offering a
> > > commercial version of Liquibase itself but rather our users would have it
> > > in their Production environments, which is still not a problem.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > 
> 

Reply via email to